Shitla Pd. Srivastava, J. - (1.) Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and has prayed for quashing the orders dated 14.10.1998, 17.4.1998 and 12.12.1997 passed by the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
(2.) Sri V. P. Rai has appeared on behalf of the contesting respondent No. 4, Smt. Omwati. He has given a statement in the Court that he will not file any counter-affidavit and is ready to argue the case without filing any counter-affidavit even today. Learned standing counsel is representing respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
(3.) The brief facts, giving rise to the present writ petition are that proceeding under the provisions of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act started. Order was passed by the Consolidation Officer. An appeal was filed before the Settlement Officer Consolidation. The Settlement Officer Consolidation instead of deciding the controversy involved in the writ petition himself allowed the appeal and remanded the case back to the Consolidation Officer to decide the same afresh. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment two revisions were filed before the Dy. Director of Consolidation. The Dy. Director of Consolidation on 14.10.1998 disposed of the two revisions by a common judgment and in paragraph 6 of the judgment, he observed that both parties in support of their objection have filed documents which were available on record. He has referred the extract from birth register and death certificate and was, of the view that in view of the fact that documents and evidence were on record, the Settlement Officer Consolidation should not have remanded the case back to the Consolidation Officer rather he should have decided the case himself. The petitioner has challenged these three orders in this petition.;